Expert testimony [may be] required not only to explain what the prior art references disclosed, but also to show that a person skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine them in order to achieve the claimed...more
5/22/2013
- Expert Testimony Obviousness Patents Prior Art Rule 37
On March 7, 2013, in In re Hubbell, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Newman, O'Malley* Wallach) affirmed the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences decision upholding the patent examiner's rejection...more
3/11/2013
- Interference Proceeding Obviousness Patents
"The law does not require that no competent attorney or alert inventor could have avoided the error sought to be corrected by reissue."
On December 14, 2012, in In re Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litig., the U.S. Court of...more
12/20/2012
- Obviousness Patents Reissue Patents
[T]he commercial success of the embodiment with additional unclaimed features is to be considered when evaluating the obviousness of the claim, provided that embodiment's success has a sufficient nexus to the claimed and...more
12/5/2012
- Inventions Obviousness Patents
